Earlier today the House Intelligence Committee released the the unclassified version of the whistleblower complaint against President Trump based on hearsay from a Trump phone call with Ukrainian President Zelensky in July.
This afternoon following the House Intelligence Committee hearing it was revealed the Deep State whistleblower is a CIA officer who was detailed to work at the White House, according to a new report by The New York Times.
Little is known about this alleged ‘whistleblower’ but the Times reported that he has since returned to the CIA.
We also know from previous reports that the “whistleblower” has “arguable political bias – in favor of a rival political candidate.”
Following the release of the whistleblower report this morning by the House Intelligence Committee former CIA analyst Fred Fleitz, who edited transcripts of presidential phone calls with foreign leaders, posted a series of tweets on this planned and coordinated attack on President Trump.
Fleitz points out that the whistleblower had a lot of help. Fleitz also asks if the whistleblower who based his complaint on hearsay may have gone to Democrat lawmakers before crafting his report.
Finally, Fred Fleitz says he believes it would not surprise him if IC officers are barred from all access to POTUS phone calls with foreign officials.
Here are his original thoughts on Twitter — via Thread reader.
1/ As a former CIA analyst and former NSC official who edited transcripts of POTUS phone calls with foreign leaders, here are my thoughts on the whistleblower complaint which was just released. . . intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/…
2/ This is not an intelligence matter. It is a policy matter and a complaint about differences over policy. Presidential phone calls are not an intelligence concern. The fact that IC officers transcribe these calls does not give the IC IG jusrisdiction over these calls.
3/ It appears that rules restricting access and knowledge of these sensitive calls was breached. This official was not on this call, not on the approved dissemination list and should not have been briefed on the call.
.3/ The way this complaint was written suggested the author had a lot of help. I know from my work on the House Intel Commitee staff that many whistleblowers go directly to the intel oversight committees. Did this whistleblower first meet with House Intel committee members?
.4/ It is therefore important that Congress find out where this complaint came from. What did House and Senate intel committee Democrat members and staff know about it and when? Did they help orchestrate this complaint?
5/ My view is that this whistleblower complaint is too convenient and too perfect to come from a typical whistleblower. Were other IC officers involved? Were outside groups opposed to the president involved?
6/ This complaint will further damage IC relations with the White House for many years to come because IC officers appear to be politicizing presidential phone calls with foreign officials and their access to the president and his activities in the White House.
7/ Worst of all, this IC officer — and probably others — have blatantly crossed the line into policy. This violates a core responsibility of IC officers is to inform, but not make policy.
8/ This is such a grevious violation of trust between the IC and the White House that it would not surprise me if IC officers are barred from all access to POTUS phone calls with foreign officials.
Fred Fleitz later posted this tweet following the hearing this morning.
.1/ To follow up on my earlier tweets & @DevinNunes's statements at @HouseIntel committee hearing today with DNI McGuire, if the whistleblower was following the rules & not speaking to the press or congressional Democrats, how did this story run on 9/19?https://t.co/7I7PWO1fZe
— Fred Fleitz (@FredFleitz) September 26, 2019